The more we practice the bunkai, the more we see it in sparring. Our sensei breaks the bunkai up into packets of line drill kumite and works the line drills over and over. We do a LOT more kumite drill than free sparring. As a result we see our bunkai popping up in free sparring. But it's hard to say "how much", as I don't know any way to measure it.

I guess it depends what type of sparring. in point sparring there wouldn't be much 1:1 comparison to kata application since the range and objectives are so different. full-contact spar has the close range, but again, the 'rules' limit the techniques found in kata. The kind of drills where you react to an unknown and resisting incomming attack is not exactly sparring...maybe in a stretch it could be called 'situational sparring'.

so I guess the answer is 'not much' as far as techniques. however, some kata principals (like angling, shifting, power generation, etc) have a bit of carryover appliable relationship to sparring I suppose. but kata certainly isn't the best thing to improve sparring. more sparring is the best thing to improve sparring. kata is for something else...or so I'm hoping

I disagree. Bunkai of kata technique can be effectively applied to sparring. I think the key difference between a sparring scenario and a self defense senario is in self defense one person is full out attacking and the other is dealing with this attack rather than a duel or game which all competitive sparring is, but that does not mean that bunkai does not apply. Does your bunkai have application to blast through an opponent who is blocking your way? Does your bunkai have application to attack and restrain an opponent? Does your bunkai have application to attack at the slightest aggressive movement or intention by your opponent. All of these scenarios can occur in kumite and bunkai of kata can be applied. Even point fighting can be used to train kata bunkai, just ask Vince Morris of Kissaki Kai. The key to developing karate through kumite is losing the ego and not concern yourself with win or lose but only training. As long as the rules allow me to punch, kick, grab, throw to the ground, and finish bunkai of kata can be explored. Of course without knee and elbow strikes some techniques cannot be used, but include those and now you have something.

I see that principles learned from kata can of course be used within a sparring enviorment to a point, but set bunkai combinations, i havent seen it yet im afraid and whilst I havent seen it all, I have seen a bit.

This post doesnt devalue kata bunkai in any way, however it does show the distinct difference between 'sparring' and simple civil self defense which is what i beleive karate is all about, and of course others see it different, which is fine by me.

as soon as bodies clash in sparring it's broken up....because you can't see the points being scored. and if you can only use a subset of techniques, then what is that? it's sparring that may or may not happen to have overlap to principals found in kata...but the mindset is sparring.

I'd never heel palm someone under the chin during sparring...thats just being rude and they might get hurt by biting their tounge, shatter some teeth or give whiplash ouchies...thats not very nice or sportsman like. (imagine that sentence as the voice of 'churchlady' from SNL)

just a different frame of mind, range, and 'game' (keyword).

not only that, but for all of the applications you find/practice in kata, do you also practice counters for? like a defense against tora guchi and ridge hand strikes? those counters...are they found in the same kata?why not? and how likely is it that one kata would have defenses from another kata's attacks?

Maybe kata was originally designed with both attack and counters and was used for training many people a skillset(pretty useful in T'ang dynasty H2H armies)... but gradually was changed and customized to civillian self-defense with the assumption the attacker is the less skilled bad-guy? which also fits why Okinawans were very careful who they taught stuff to. fight against someone with the same set of techniques and it just comes down to physical endurance and speed...not good odds for a SD system.

kata techniques in it's present form isn't for using against itself. sure you can make stuff up and say it's based on it's principals of movement...you could even pick out parts of another kata where the defense against a defense looks similar and convincing. what I'm saying is, a single kata does not have all the defenses, and counters to its own defenses. thats why kata is not for combat (unless you've studied with someone with THE lost kata up on a mountain somewhere), it's an uneven SD system. the assumption is an aggressor not an equally matched opponent. in my opinion anyway.

Ed, you have got to be kidding me. True okinawan karate has it all. It is useful for fighting the skilled an unskilled alike. You need to give the okinawans more credit. I believe they were smarter than you think. To make a fighting art that does not work against fighters is stupid. Especially if it is supposed to be used to defend the king and his regents it better work against skilled fighters. Yes this was the purpose of true karate.

lol..nope I'm not kidding. I'm talking about individual kata in and of themselves are designed (or were redesigned) for self-defense. are you saying the same 1 kata has counters to it's own self-defense? If you are, then tell me where the counter is in saifa to its final sequence.

[addition] Kata doesn't have it all. IMO. Kata is a tool that is just as important as 2-person drills. Different kata address different principles...if they didn't, then we'd have one kata containing all principles for any profession for any scenario. rediculous. Wouldn't you agree that a body guard needs a similar but different set of fighting skills than someone on a H2H battlefield or someone in danger of being mugged? isn't the difference in probable skill level of the attack? wouldn't systems be devised and be optimized for the current and real threat?

If it's agreed that kata is always changing, then what has driven the change? need and utility perhaps? where are we in history in which we inherit kata? was it unchanged from a Chinese temple? or unchanged from a castle guard? how can you be sure it's in the same form? last time I looked at the history, the effective occupation of people changing kata and making curriculums were okinawan policeman for civil defense. changes after that were for sport.

unless you are suggesting you didn't inherit kata from the civil police generations but rather from the ones before them...in which case I have no comment.